Thursday, February 2, 2017

A Catholic bishop and a supposed ex-gay in disagreement

Bishop Robert Barron
Lianne Laurence, a “reporter” for LifeSiteNews.com, posted a very interesting piece on Thursday titled: “Bishop Barron tells ‘gay’ interviewer: I wouldn’t press to reverse ‘gay marriage’ decision.” These folks are passionate about the use of defensive quotation marks which is fundamentally premised on the false notion that we seek their approval. It's a petty way of demonstrating disapproval. I responded in kind. But I digress.

Robert Barron is the auxiliary bishop of Los Angeles. Barron appeared on The Rubin Report which is a widely viewed Youtube presentation with some unusually good production values for that format. Rubin, by the way, happens to be a married gay man. I watched part of the video. It's worth a look. I am curious how someone at LSN became aware of the interview.

Barron is an interesting guy with a huge social media presence including 1.2 million Facebook followers. He is well educated, speaks four languages and is rather reasonable for a Catholic bishop. The following is from the LifeSite piece:
Rubin questioned the bishop on his “personal feelings” about the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling that legalized homosexual “marriage”: “I assume you felt it was a wrong decision by the court?”

“I do,” replied Barron. “But I don’t think I want to press it further. I think where we are right now in the States, I’ll apply the Aquinas principle. I think it would probably cause much more problems and dissension and difficulty if we keep pressing it.”
Fair enough. I generally reserve my criticism of the Catholic Church for three things: Attempting to impose its teachings on public policy, treating its LGBT employees shamefully and attempting to usurp science with the promotion of ignorance regarding LGBT children, particularly trans kids.

Attempting to reverse Obergefell would be an effort to impose Catholicism on public policy. The Church never should have attemtped to do so in the first place.

Later on:
Barron also criticized what he sees as the Catholic Church’s approach to homosexuality.

“I said this one time, I was in New York with Cardinal Dolan actually, and we were talking to reporters,” the bishop related.

“And I said, if the only thing a gay person hears from the Catholic Church is, ‘you’re intrinsically disordered,’ we’ve got a very serious problem, if that’s what the message has become.”
Laurence continues with some decent reporting on the conversation. She should have left it at that. Nevertheless, she couldn't resist the utter stupidity of …
Joseph Sciambra, a Catholic formerly caught up in the homosexual lifestyle, issued a scathing rebuttal of the bishop’s comments.

“Would Bishop Barron get on a ‘crusader’s tank’ in order to overturn Roe v. Wade?” Sciambra wrote on his blog. “I assume he would. Why are the lives of those suffering from same sex attraction worth less? Have they not also been victimized by the culture of death?”
Okay, I'll play too. Sciambra is a gay man who chooses not to have gay sex because of his religious beliefs  superstitions. Brian Tashman once referred to Sciambra as the “ex-Nazi-witch-Satanist-porn-star who authored the salacious memoir ‘Swallowed by Satan.’” They all write a book. It's part of the ex-gay culture. The eunuch also writes a blog subtitled: “How Our Lord Jesus Christ Saved Me From Homosexuality, Pornography, and the Occult.”

I support reproductive choice. However, it is a choice. Being gay is not a choice so comparing gays to abortion is preposterous. Personally, I do not “suffer” from being gay. My late partner did because he was a Catholic who sought the approval of the Church. Whatever suffering gay people endure is created by religious bigotry. Exhibits of that bigotry are calling a sexual orientation a “lifestyle” and “a culture of death.” Coming from a gay man that makes Sciambra a miserable fag and a fool as well.
He likewise shredded Barron’s comments on the Catholic Church’s evangelization to homosexual persons.

“In my 18 years as an ex-gay man, I have never once met a single person who said that a priest, or anyone for that matter – in the Church, told them that they were in any way ‘disordered’,” he added.

“In truth, the principle complaints are that priests and ministries were typically overly facilitating and gay-approving.”
This guy expects us to believe that gay people claim that the Church is too accepting of gay people. Seriously? They don't and it's not.
The “predominant message coming out from the Church on this issue” is from gay-affirmative parishes, which in many dioceses have been allowed to flourish, he pointed out.

“If the Church has been ‘disordered’ in any sense on this issue – it’s that Bishops have allowed for this confusion and open deception to continue completely unchecked.”
I am not sure whether Sciambra has selective hearing or is just generally full of crap. I suspect the latter.
Sciambra also called out Barron for conflating the sexual inclination with the person.

“The first thing ‘a gay person’ should hear is that they are in reality not ‘a gay person’,” Sciambra. “You do that by simply not calling them ‘gay’.”
I am lost amid the smear quotes. Nevertheless, I am a gay man. I am most certainly not defined by my sexual orientation which is most certainly not an “inclination” There is no evidence that the belief in a deity or any form of religious practice can alter sexual orientation. In fact there is no evidence that anything can alter someone's sexual orientation. We get it at birth or shortly thereafter and it is no more mutable than our natural eye color. No one should be ashamed of being gay and the Church is in the shame business.

Furthermore, no one should be defined by the words in ancient chronicles of dubious provenance that were written by men with no understanding of sexual orientation or that sexual orientation even existed. That's just stupid.

Like every other supposed public ex-gay, Sciambra  makes a living by claiming to be ex-gay. Now that is defining. It is also the source of undue discrimination and oppression. In other words, the schmuck is toxic.

Related content:




No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.